Funding for libraries is increasingly in jeopardy with SaveLibraries reporting that Colorado, Ohio, and New Jersey are especially feeling the pinch at the moment. It is a tragedy that a service as valuable as the public library is facing funding threats that seek to strip away such a core asset from so many communities. I am in no way making the claim that these funding cuts can be completely or even substantially compensated for by following any ideas listed below but I do feel that there are somethings that will save money and provide a better service and I think in times like these maybe every little bit helps…

Meredith Farkas just gave a presentation at CIL2010 where she has rightly stated that all too often when it comes to tech projects, they are given as add-on projects, heaped onto an already overworked member of staff who receives no reward for their extra time and labor. I agree. Libraries ideally should invest in emerging technology librarians or some similar position. However, right now with budget cuts threatening jobs if a move to open source can free up enough for a salary or too it may be worth the thankless hours of extra work.

In a previous blog I mentioned Koha, which I stand by as an open source catalog that rivals or outperforms a number of proprietary systems. A move to Koha could save a library money. However, here I also really want to focus on open source content management systems. In particular, there has been a lot of attention paid to Drupal lately and I think for good reason.

The first bit to note about Drupal is that it is supported by DreamHost which offers free web hosting for non-profits so this could save libraries in two web-related areas. The next bit to note is that the SOPAC project is proving that your CMS can actually replace an OPAC. As a free solution with a large and active developer community and a wide range of modules (including library-specific modules) for customization the question really becomes why aren’t more (or all) libraries moving over to Drupal.

To find an answer one needs to look no further than a lecture that I had to today where a couple of lecturers tried to show five different options for CMS implementation and also tried to examine the disadvantages of the open source option. Now, I don’t think open source is for everyone but I think New York Public Library proved that open source is for every library.

2. Open source does not have as many features as proprietary: Drupal has a sea of modules. As mentioned before, some are specifically for libraries. The lecturers mentioned link management and application integration as two areas were open source doesn’t compete with proprietary but as can be seen in the last link they do on the library page and even more in the list of general modules.

3. They claim that open source solutions are only for small projects that are one server based. First, for most libraries a one server solution is probably adequate but once again I didn’t have to look far to find that Drupal can be installed across multiple servers. In terms of large projects, NYPL has 50,000 nodes. I can’t imagine most libraries needing even a tenth of that many. In sum, open source can handle big projects.

What is the reason? What other reason could there be to not make the move? Sadly, I think it is just librarians unwilling to be innovative and to take on a new skill like PHP. However, without open source projects like Drupal I think libraries will never be able to customize the service that they deliver to users and will never be able to keep up with trends. It has become easier than ever to start and modify a Drupal site and with a little training staff can not only contribute content but can work on code to enhance the system. Any problems that cannot be solved can be outsourced to the Drupal community and I think that one would be hard pressed to spend more on the occasional call to a Drupal developer than even the standard annual fee for customer service on most proprietary systems.

However, this last bit seems to be the other cog in the wheel. Managers seem to want someone they can call who will be accountable. Staff may be unwilling to put their own neck on the line. It can be easier to just know that if anything goes wrong there is somewhere to pass the buck.

It seems somehow equally tragic though that this budget crisis could be mitigated, if even in a small way, and a better service could be offered but the road blocks are old paradigms and an unwillingness to learn a new skill. One of the major calls for libraries is too be places for informal learning opportunities and it seems we are having a hard time using them that way ourselves. The information required to make critical system changes that respond to user needs is all out there; and that’s what we do we find information. In fact, a book on the subject may even be in your local library…. that is if it’s still there.